跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.194.255) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/07/19 08:38
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:邱意淳
研究生(外文):Yi-Chun Chiu
論文名稱:國際航線座位升等競標行為之研究
論文名稱(外文):Bidding Behaviors for Upgrading Airline Seats in International Flights
指導教授:周榮昌周榮昌引用關係郭仲偉郭仲偉引用關係
指導教授(外文):Rong-Chang JouChung-Wei Kuo
口試委員:顏上堯邱裕鈞楊大輝湯慶輝
口試委員(外文):Shang-Yao YanYu-Chiun ChiouTa-Hui YANGChing-Hui Tang
口試日期:2022-06-24
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立暨南國際大學
系所名稱:土木工程學系
學門:工程學門
學類:土木工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2022
畢業學年度:110
語文別:中文
論文頁數:84
中文關鍵詞:競標座位Double-Hurdle模式IHS Double-Hurdle模式願付價格
外文關鍵詞:Bidding for seatsDouble-Hurdle modelIHS double-hurdle modelWillingness to pay (WTP)
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:155
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:23
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
座位競標策略是近年許多國外航空公司採用的商業模式之一,但台灣的航空公司尚未實施。為了瞭解旅客的座位競價情況,本研究應用Double-Hurdle模式、IHS Double-Hurdle模式討論影響旅客參與競價的因素並校估支付意願。此外,本研究進一步探討不同人格特質對旅客參與競價及其支付意願的影響。研究結果顯示,重要因素、人格特質、出價參考點等項目皆會影響旅客在長短程航線上的競標參與度和支付意願。短程和長程航線在競標參考點的共同變數是參考點低於心中願付價格。在人格特質方面,情緒不穩定性且高學歷的受訪者在短程航線(台灣到宿霧和首爾)的情境中不太願意出價。另一方面,對經驗開放性且家庭年收入高於平均的受訪者更願意在長程航線(台灣到紐約和阿姆斯特丹)的情境中出價。此外,在旅客認為重要的項目中發現航線地點對長程航線的座位競價行為具有正顯著影響。本研究亦將航線地點分為休閒與商務地區比較,為瞭解不同城市特性與航程長短是否對旅客有明顯影響。研究結果顯示,根據城市特性,受訪者的參與意願與願付價格無顯著差異;但短程和長程的航線距離可能造成影響因素的差異。
The strategic planning on the bidding of international airline seats is one of the business models run by practitioners in the airline business. Meanwhile, airline companies in Taiwan has not carried out any seat-bidding activities. Thus, in order to learn passengers’ seat bidding behavior, this study discussed the factors that affect passengers to participate in the bidding and estimate their willingness to pay (WTP) by using the double-hurdle model and the inverse hyperbolic sine (IHS) double-hurdle model. In addition, this study further discussed the effects of different personality traits on passengers’ participation in bidding and their WTPs. The results of this study showed that important factors, personality traits and bid reference benchmark all affect passengers’ participation in bidding and their WTPs on long- and short-distance routes. The common variable included in short- and long-distance routes was the bid reference benchmark is lower than the WTP. In terms of personality traits, respondents with neuroticism and high education level were less willing to pay in the bidding on the short-distance route (from Taiwan to Cebu and Seoul). On the other hand, respondents had openness to experience and having an annual household income higher than the average were more willing to pay in the bidding on the long-distance route (from Taiwan to New York and Amsterdam). In addition, among the items that passengers consider important, the route location was found to be positively significant in seat bidding behavior on long-distance routes. The purpose of this study was to understand whether a city’s characteristics and the length of the route would affect the respondents’ willingness to participate in seat bidding and their WTP. Therefore, leisure and business areas were added to the short- and long-distance scenarios to compare the respondents’ bidding behaviors. The estimation results showed no significant difference between the respondents’ willingness to participate and their WTP based on city characteristics; however, the distances of the short-distance and long-distance routes may have caused differences in the influencing factors.
目次
致謝詞 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iii
目次 v
表目次 vii
圖目次 ix
第一章 緒論 1
1.1研究背景與動機 1
1.2研究目的 3
1.3研究範圍與對象 3
1.4研究流程 4
第二章 現況及文獻回顧 6
2.1 競標座位發展現況 6
2.2 Double-Hurdle 模式 8
2.3人格特質 11
2.4航空相關研究 12
2.5 小結 14
第三章 研究方法 15
3.1研究校估程序 15
3.2 Double-Hurdle 模式 17
3.3 彈性 19
3.4 Inverse Hyperbolic Sine(IHS) double-hurdle 模式 20
第四章 問卷設計與初步分析 22
4.1 問卷設計 22
4.1.1 第一次問卷 22
4.1.2 第二次問卷 23
4.2 問卷資料分析 25
4.2.1 第一次問卷資料分析 25
4.2.2 第二次問卷資料分析 29
第五章 模式校估結果 38
5.1 第一次問卷變數說明及校估結果 38
5.2 第二次問卷變數說明及校估結果 43
第六章 結論與建議 57
6.1 結論 57
6.2 建議 61
6.3 營銷影響 62
參考文獻 63
一、英文部分 63
二、網路部分 68
附錄 69
附錄一 全球26家提供競價座位服務的航空公司 69
附錄二 問卷一內容 71
附錄三 問卷二內容 75
附錄四 目標人群重新權重的平均值計算方式 84

表目次
表4. 1 問卷差異的對照表 25
表4. 2 受訪者社會與旅次特性調查統計 26
表4. 3 受訪者社會與旅次特性調查統計(續1) 27
表4. 4 受訪者之座位競標經驗調查統計 28
表4. 5 受訪者之座位競標重視因素調查統計 29
表4. 6 受訪者的社會經濟特性統計 30
表4. 7 受訪者的社會經濟特性統計(續1) 31
表4. 8 受訪者的社會經濟特性統計(續2) 32
表4. 9 近三年的搭機經驗 32
表4. 10 座位競價參與經驗分析 32
表4. 11 競標座位關注項目統計表 34
表4. 12 競價座位關注項目的重要性統計表 34
表4. 13 競價參考點調查 35
表4. 14 人格特質統計表(樣本數:897) 36
表4. 15 驗證性因素分析結果 37
表5. 1 顯著變數說明表 39
表5. 2 長程航線(洛杉磯)座位競標願付價格之校估結果 40
表5. 3 短程航線(日本)座位競標之願付價格校估結果 41
表5. 4 長程航線於DOUBLE-HURDLE模式的邊際機率結果 42
表5. 5 短程航線於DOUBLE-HURDLE模式的邊際機率結果 43
表5. 6 重新權重樣本的前後變數動差 44
表5. 7 重新權重樣本的前後變數動差(續1) 45
表5. 8 目標人群計算平均值方式 45
表5. 9 羅吉斯迴歸模式校估顯著變數說明 46
表5. 10 羅吉斯迴歸模式校估結果(參考點為低於商務艙票價) 47
表5. 11 羅吉斯迴歸模式校估結果(參考點為近似於經濟艙票價) 48
表5. 12 羅吉斯迴歸模式校估結果(參考點為低於心中願付價格) 49
表5. 13 短程航線的顯著變數說明表 50
表5. 14 IHS DOUBLE-HURDLE模式短程航線的校估結果 51
表5. 15 長程航線的顯著變數說明表 53
表5. 16 IHS DOUBLE-HURDLE模式長程航線的校估結果 54
表5. 17 模式比較表 56
附表4 A 性別 84
附表4 B 年齡 84
附表4 C 教育程度 84
附表4 D 婚姻狀態 84

圖目次
圖1. 1 全日空航空競標座位(BID MY PRICE)的操作流程 2
圖1. 2 研究流程圖 5
圖3. 1 校估流程圖 16
一、英文部分
1.Adusah-Poku, F. & Takeuchi, K. (2019). Household energy expenditure in Ghana: A double-hurdle model approach. World Development, 117, 266-277.
2.Akkuş, A. (2019). Developing a Scale to Measure Students’ Attitudes toward Science. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 706-720.
3.Amemiya, T. (1985), Advanced Econometrics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
4.Angulo, A.M., Gil, J.M., and Gracia, A. (2001). The demand for alcoholic beverages in Spain. Agricultural Economics, 26, 71-83.
5.Blundell, R. & Meghir, C. (1987). Bivariate alternatives to the Tobit model. Journal of Econometrics, 34(1-2), 179-200.
6.Burbidge, J. B., Magee, L. and Robb A. L. (1988) Alternative Transformations to Handle Extreme Values of the Dependent Variable. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83(401), 123-127.
7.Byrne, P. J., Jr., O. C. , Saha, A. (1996). Analysis of Food-Away-from-Home Expenditure Patterns for U.S. Households, 1982–89. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78(3), 614-627.
8.Choo, S. & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2004). What type of vehicle do people drive? The role of attitude and lifestyle in influencing vehicle type choice. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 38(3), 201-222.
9.Cragg, J. G. (1971). Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods. Econometrica, 829-844.
10.Eakins, J. (2016). An application of the double hurdle model to petrol and diesel household expenditures in Ireland. Transport Policy, 47, 84-93.
11.Gao, X., Wailes, E. J. & Cramer, G. L. (1995). Double-hurdle Model with Bivariate Normal Errors: An Application to U.S. Rice Demand. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 27(2), 363-376.
12.Gao, X., Wailes, E. J. & Cramer, G. L. (1995). Double-hurdle Model with Bivariate Normal Errors: An Application to U.S. Rice Demand. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 27(2), 363-376.
13.Guo, Z. & McDonnell S. (2013). Curb parking pricing for local residents: An exploration in New York City based on willingness to pay. Transport Policy, 30, 186-198.
14.Hainmueller, J. & Xu, Y. (2013). ebalance: A Stata Package for Entropy Balancing. Journal of Statistical Software, 54(7), 1-18.
15.Hainmueller, J. (2012). Entropy balancing for causal effects: A multivariate reweighting method to produce balanced samples in observational studies. Political Analysis, 20(1), 25-46.
16.Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153-161.
17.James, G., Daniela, W., Trevor, H. & Robert, T. (2017). An introduction to statistical learning (8th ed.). New York: Springer Science+Business Media. ISBN 978-1-4614-7138-7.
18.Jou, R. C. & Chen, T. Y. (2015). Willingness to Pay of Air Passengers for Carbon-Offset. Sustainability, 7(3), 3071-3085.
19.Jou, R. C. & Syu, L. W. (2021). Drunk Drivers’ Willingness to Use and to Pay for Designated Drivers. Sustainability, 13(10), 562.
20.Jou, R. C., Chiu, Y. C. & Kuo, C. W. (2021). Low-Cost Carrier Passengers’ Willingness to Pay for the Seat Preselection Service: A Case Study on the Taiwan-Japan Route. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2021, 1-14.
21.Kuo, C. W. & Jou, R. C. (2017). Willingness to pay for airlines’ premium economy class: The perspective of passengers. Journal of Air Transport Management, 59, 134-142.
22.Kuo, C. W. & Jou, R. C. (2018). Air passengers’ willingness to pay for counter check-in services. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 107, 203-215.
23.Landay, K., Wood, D., Harms, P. D., Ferrell, B. & Nambisan, S. (2020). Relationships between personality facets and accident involvement among truck drivers. Journal of Research in Personality, 84, 103889.
24.Lu, J. L. and Wang, C. Y. (2018). Investigating the impacts of air travelers’ environmental knowledge on attitudes toward carbon offsetting and willingness to mitigate the environmental impacts of aviation. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 59, 96-107.
25.Machin, M, A. & Sankey, K. S. (2008). Relationships between young drivers' personality characteristics, risk perceptions, and driving behaviour. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40(2), 541-547.
26.Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Economics, New York: Cambridge University Press.
27.Maria, V, J., Tobias, H. & Per Johansson. (2006). The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice. Transportation Research Part A, 40(6), 507-525.
28.Rossini, G., Jimena, V., & Edith D. (2015). Household Cheese Consumption in Argentina: A Double-Hurdle Model Estimation. Research in Agricultural & Applied Economics.
29.Shiwakoti, N., Jiang, H. & Nguyen, A. D. (2021). Passengers’ perception of safety and its relationship with demographics, service quality, satisfaction and loyalty in airlines sector - A case study of Vietnam to Australia route. Transport Policy.
30.Song, W. K. & Lee, H. C. (2020). An analysis of traveler need for and willingness to purchase airline dynamic packaging: A Korean case study. Journal of Air Transport Management, 82, 101735.
31.Su, M., Luan, W. & Sun, T. (2019). Effect of high-speed rail competition on airlines’ intertemporal price strategies. Journal of Air Transport Management, 80, 101694.
32.Šucha, M. & Černochová, D. (2016). Driver Personality as a Valid Predictor of Risky Driving. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 4286-4295.
33.Tsafarakis, S., Kokotas, T. & Pantouvakis, A. (2018). A multiple criteria approach for airline passenger satisfaction measurement and service quality improvement. Journal of Air Transport Management, 68, 61-75.
34.Ulleberg, P. (2001). Personality subtypes of young drivers. Relationship to risk-taking preferences, accident involvement, and response to a traffic safety campaign. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 4(4), 279-297.
35.Van Buuren, S. (2018). Flexible Imputation of Missing Data. Second Edition. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
36.Yang, H., Dobruszkes, F., Wang, J., Dijst, M. & Witte, P. (2018). Comparing China's urban systems in high-speed railway and airline networks. Journal of Transport Geography, 68, 233-244.
37.Yazdanpanah, M. & Hosseinlou, M. H. (2016). The influence of personality traits on airport public transport access mode choice: A hybrid latent class choice modeling approach. Journal of Air Transport Management, 55, 147-163.
38.Yen, S. T. & Jones, A. (1997). Household Consumption of Cheese: An Inverse Hyperbolic Sine Double-Hurdle Model with Dependent Errors. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 79(1), 246-251.
39.Yen, S. T. & Su, S. J. (1995). Modeling U.S. Butter Consumption with Zero Observations. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 24(1), 47-55.
40.Zhang, R., Johnson, D. Zhao, W. & Nash, C. (2019). Competition of airline and high-speed rail in terms of price and frequency: Empirical study from China. Transport Policy, 78, 8-18.
41.Zheng, S., Ge, Y. E., Fu, X. & Jiang, C. (2019). Voluntary carbon offset and airline alliance. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 123, 110-126.
42.Zhou, Y., Zhang, T., Mo, Y., & Huang, G. (2020). Willingness to pay for economy class seat selection: From a Chinese air consumer perspective. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 37, 100486.

二、網路部分
1.全日空官方網站 (2021),競標流程,擷取日期:2021年2月,網站:https://www.ana.co.jp/zh/tw/plan-book/additional-services/bid-my-price/。
2.行政院主計處 (2022),109年家庭收支調查,擷取日期:2022年4月18日,網站:https://win.dgbas.gov.tw/fies/a11.asp?year=109。
3.行政院性別平等會重要性別統計資料庫 (2022),性別、年齡、教育程度統計,擷取日期:2022年4月18日,網站:https://www.gender.ey.gov.tw/gecdb/Stat_Statistics_Query.aspx?sn=Jvwu1Ndiotx2AzKr6MD1kg%40%40&statsn=EcfUJy%24sRRPbnOe4TvO%24Jg%40%40。
4.中華民國統計資訊網 (2022),結婚率統計,擷取日期:2022年4月18日,網站:https://www.stat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=15409&CtNode=3622&mp=4。
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top